Dealing with photographers

Subject: Dealing with photographers
From: Johnny J
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 08:19 AM

The festival and "filming" season is now approaching.

I do appreciate that sensitive and professional photography is beneficial and even essential for promoting and recording events and even some of the "special informal moments" too.

However, in many situations it is very irritating for audience members, people playing music in sessions, or even just some of us having a social drink.

I don't really mind the odd "tourist snap" or friends taking a photograph but it's these over zealous photographers and camera people who wander around audiences, in pubs when sessions are in progress.... One guy even asked me to move once to "get a better shot" of another player! Apart from the upheaval and disruption, one has to put up with constant flashes and/or constant camera lights.

Quite often, the so called "professional" photographers hired by the festivals are often the worst offenders. While I realise that they may be required for more official and formal duties, they should not be interfering in the more informal aspects... e.g. pub sessions and so on.

So, any suggestions on how to deal with them? Tactfully or otherwise.

I thought I could just take my phone out and start filming them back but that wouldn't be very nice. No point in stooping to their level! Or I could suggest that I came filmed them when they were enjoying their own hobbies(other than photography) e.g. when they were enjoying a quiet spot of fishing, playing sport etc. Or playing darts, pool etc in the pub.

Any suggestions, humorous or otherwise?

Subject: RE: Dealing with prhotographers
From: Raggytash
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 08:24 AM

Why not try the direct approach, Oy, if you take any more pictures I'll stuff that ******* camera up your ****!

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 10:04 AM

It may not count as a festival, but when our daughter was married, the wedding photographer was loud and intrusive, and Would Not Shut Up, even when told to by the bride's mother during the signing of the register. (The unposed photos taken by his wife were actually rather better.) To this day, the title Conan the Photographer brings a shudder.

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 11:46 AM

Many years ago at the Smithsonian Festival, a friend & I were taking the odd photo when we were bemused/offended by a guy with 3 big Nikons and long lenses around his neck. We nicknamed him "Click". He wandered up & down in front of various stages, seemingly oblivious to whose sight he blocked in the audience.
   I think I saw a stage manager explaining the propriety of it all.

In a private setting like weddings, small groups, it should be possible for organizers to control behavior. "Stop being intrusive if you want to be paid." ought to be enough.

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 12:12 PM

At my cousin's daughter's wedding a dozen years ago she hired a friend to take photos, but he did a terrible job. I had a small digital Nikon Coolpix (12X) tucked in my handbag and managed through the couple of days of activities to get some very nice photos. When I heard from my cousin that the photographer came up with junk I posted a set of mine online and ended up sending her files to print. Those were the only ones they used.

I have taken photos at university musical events (sponsored by our department) and had people complain about the shutter noise, so usually make a point of turning off audible camera stuff. Invariably it seemed (in the days of film) that when you tried not to upset people and didn't take many photos that there'd be a camera glitch or operator error and few or none turn out; the extra photos are possibly by someone who is hoping that a few of them will be what they want. It's impossible to be invisible with the cameras but you can usually plan ahead so you step up, take photos, then step back out of the way.

Now I wonder at all of the people holding up their phones to record and photograph events. As a photographer who usually uses a camera instead of the phone, I don't do that because I find I appreciate the performance more and remember it better without it. Yes, get a few photos, but most of what ends up in the phone is never looked at again.

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: Charley Noble
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 03:16 PM

My wife and I take a lot of photos at sea music festivals. We do have long lenses and generally stay way in the back out of sight; our cameras are good enough to function reasonably well in poor light situations which is ironic at festivals we attend.

I agree that there is nothing more obnoxious to a performer than someone in the front row taking photos; some even stand up to get their shot.

Charlie Ipcar

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 04:59 PM

Just a point or two about photography in the UK:

Anyone in a public place has no right to privacy, and you can't stop people taking pictures of you. If you're actively harassing someone, e.g., by following them round to take pictures, or sticking your camera in their face, that's different and you could be breaking the law.

If you're on private land, or in a museum, gallery or theatre, technically you must seek permission to take photos. Of course, this is very loosely observed, and in practice no-one's really going to object if you're taking photos of your kids at Hampton Court, for example. But any venue is entitled to make its own rules: if they say no photography, or no flash, etc., you must observe those restrictions. Their maximum sanction is to ask you to desist, and if you persist you can be asked to leave. No-one may seize or damage your camera, make you hand over your memory card, nor insist that you show them your photos or make you delete them.

There is no law saying that you can't take a photo of a policeman in the street. It might not be entirely sensible so to do. If an entertainment venue hasn't explicitly forbidden photography or videos, they would have an uphill struggle to stop you, though they'd be within their rights to get you to desist. I doubt whether offended individuals would be able to take it on themselves to act, other than making a polite request to desist. I suppose you could ask the venue's organisers to intervene, though they could have other things on their minds.

I don't know what the rules are in other countries. I have hundreds of photos that I've taken without challenge inside European churches and galleries, including the Uffizzi, Bargello and Accademia in Florence and the Vatican Museums and Sistine Chapel in Rome (though the latter does have signs up which just about everyone ignores - you seem to be generally OK as long as you don't use flash, and camera phones are far less prominent than huge great SLRs).

But rules are just rules. Common sense, discretion and consideration for others should be the only rules we need, on the whole.

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 05:55 PM

> Now I wonder at all of the people holding up their
> phones to record and photograph events.

There seems to be an entire generation who can't experience things by looking at them directly, but only through their viewfinders. This was first observed (not by me) three or four decades ago in Disneyland, but now seems to include meals in restaurants, not just fake maharajas' palaces which look more like the real thing than the actual real thing.*

* If you know what I was reading, please speak up: the cat ate my indexing cards.

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: Jack Campin
Date: 15 Mar 25 - 08:33 PM

Pros will know how to be discreet.

I have no problem with being recorded but a few years ago you used to get videographers using on-camera lights. I can get migraines from bright point light sources so fuck off with that.

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: GUEST,Ray
Date: 16 Mar 25 - 07:31 AM

I remember pointing out to a pro. photographer at an intimate John Jorgenson gig that we had paid to get in and perhaps he should sling his hook, which he did. It didn’t however prevent one of his photos from being used for some time in s Schertler advertisement which I found amusing.

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: Johnny J
Date: 16 Mar 25 - 06:57 PM

Note folks, I said " so called "professional" photographers ".

Perhaps, "official" would be a better description than "professional"?

Often these individuals are more keen hobbyists or aspiring individuals hoping to gain experience and advance their careers. So, festivals and similar organisations may sometimes encourage them and offer an opportunity possibly because they are "cheap", have "volunteered", or it's just "nice to be nice".

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: Pappy Fiddle
Date: 16 Mar 25 - 11:03 PM

Before cell phones, I used to use a Nikon SLR, and I bought a 200mm telephoto zoom lens for it. This did two things:

1) I could sit in a corner at a wedding or activity, and just quietly take photos without botherin' anybody much... use the lens to "get close"

2) If you get about ten inches from a person's face, the photo will make their nose as big as an apple, because their nose is 8 inches away and their eyes 10, their ears 14 so the nose will appear almost 2X too large. If you get back 30 or 50 feet with a telephoto lens, they look SO much better because they are all 50 feet away +/- 3 inches, which is 1/2 percent.

With these cell phones now, you can be 50 feet away and zoom in electronically

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Mar 25 - 05:30 AM

Photographers should not be that intrusive that they spoil the event for other people in the audience, neither should they put off musicains or singers.
I remember many years ago[ 50?] the great singer Ramblin Jack Elliot getting annoyed with photographers, so this phenomenon has been ongoing for many years

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: Long Firm Freddie
Date: 22 Mar 25 - 05:51 AM

I play for morris and there are some photographers we regularly see at festivals and dance outs. They are respectful, friendly, seek permission for individual shots and from the sides if not previously known to them. They learn how the dances go so that they can get the best shots without being intrusive. They also remember to take photos of the musicians!

A number of years ago another photographer (ie not one I have described above) decided to walk along in front of the musicians and stick his camera under the nose of each musician in turn, whislt the dance was in progress.

The second word I uttered was off!

LFF

Subject: RE: Dealing with photographers
From: GUEST,An old fogey
Date: 24 Mar 25 - 09:56 AM

Separate but related.   Some of us date back to the pre-camera phone and pad era, along with pre-Internet. In the past tourists or recorders of events, just had photo cameras, video recorders and the cine camera. Then came the Internet Youtube, social media etc.   The ball game changed and everyone and their dog is posting live music events on the Internet. Whilst photographs of public events are usually fair game, people should remember that music is copyright. Much diminished copyright, but the principle exists. You may own the recording of the event, but outside of personal use you don't own the automatic right to repost performances, or the material being performed. A large venue may rightfully have rules about recording. The music copyright point gets lost in the vastness of the largely unstoppable rise of sharing music event videos. Back to the photography, there may theoretically be image rights of the individual violated if some big time commercial use is then made of a photograph that focuses on an individual without a formal model release form.